I ask because, I don't know about the Latin Mass, but even within the Byzantine tradition, there are local differences in tradition (such as between the Slavs and the Greeks).

« Last Edit: July 23, 2012, 03:07:06 AM by Benjamin the Red »

Logged

"Hades is not a place, no, but a state of the soul. It begins here on earth. Just so, paradise begins in the soul of a man here in the earthly life. Here we already have contact with the divine..." -St. John, Wonderworker of Shanghai and San Francisco, Homily On the Sunday of Orthodoxy

Quis custodiet ipsos custodes? Who can watch the watchmen?"No one is paying attention to your post reports"Why do posters that claim to have me blocked keep sending me pms and responding to my posts? That makes no sense.

Quis custodiet ipsos custodes? Who can watch the watchmen?"No one is paying attention to your post reports"Why do posters that claim to have me blocked keep sending me pms and responding to my posts? That makes no sense.

Quis custodiet ipsos custodes? Who can watch the watchmen?"No one is paying attention to your post reports"Why do posters that claim to have me blocked keep sending me pms and responding to my posts? That makes no sense.

Why did certain parishes drop the litany of the catechumens? Is this a per parish thing? Or a Church thing?

There are always (hopefully) catechumens out there.

My Ukrainian church loudly prays for the catechumens! What I truly find funny though, is when the priest instructs the catechumens to bow their heads, about half of the parishioners bow. I guess they just don't know what a catechumen is.

Logged

Conquer evil men by your gentle kindness, and make zealous men wonder at your goodness. Put the lover of legality to shame by your compassion. With the afflicted be afflicted in mind. Love all men, but keep distant from all men.—St. Isaac of Syria

Well, not quite. Churches of the Ecumenical Patriarchate began reading the litany of the catechumens silently (it's not omitted), though it's still done in many parishes. Other Greek churches, such as Cyprus, still pray the litany of the catechumens as normal.

Interesting article, but I have a question about this: "Following the 1838 reform, the Greeks (except the Athonite monks who kept the old order) replaced Psalms 102/103 ("Bless the Lord, O my soul") and 145/146 ("Praise the Lord, O my soul") as well as the Beatitudes, which follow, by antiphons, i.e. brief appeals to the Theotokos or to Christ, Who is risen and is praised in His saints. The Russians continue to sing, each Sunday, the two noted psalms and the Beatitudes. They are replaced by antiphons only at great feasts or on weekdays."

I am a bit confused as the Greek Catholic usage, at least for the Ruthenians and the Galician/Ukrainians, in the Sluzebniks published in the 19th century in both Presov and some in L'viv prescribed the 'reformed' antiphons AND the Beatitudes. During the Great Fast, the Psalms 102/103 and 145/146 were prescribed in the place of aforementioned antiphons. It is my understanding that this comes from the so-called Ruthenian Rescension(sic) as promulgated through the reforms of St. Peter Mohyla in the mid-17th century and which would have represented the common practice in that part of Europe dating back to pre-union times. (ACROD's Liturgy in English follows this form to this day.) Perhaps I am in error, but this would lead me to believe that the Church of Constantinople had used this practice at a far earlier date in time than 1838 - at least into the late 16th and early 17th centuries - being the time frame of the Unions of Brest and Uzhorod. Perhaps 1838 is the date when an attempt to make the same a uniform practice within all of the Church of Constantinople took place? Perhaps a student of Liturgical History might have the answer. Thank you!

Interesting article, but I have a question about this: "Following the 1838 reform, the Greeks (except the Athonite monks who kept the old order) replaced Psalms 102/103 ("Bless the Lord, O my soul") and 145/146 ("Praise the Lord, O my soul") as well as the Beatitudes, which follow, by antiphons, i.e. brief appeals to the Theotokos or to Christ, Who is risen and is praised in His saints. The Russians continue to sing, each Sunday, the two noted psalms and the Beatitudes. They are replaced by antiphons only at great feasts or on weekdays."

I am a bit confused as the Greek Catholic usage, at least for the Ruthenians and the Galician/Ukrainians, in the Sluzebniks published in the 19th century in both Presov and some in L'viv prescribed the 'reformed' antiphons AND the Beatitudes. During the Great Fast, the Psalms 102/103 and 145/146 were prescribed in the place of aforementioned antiphons. It is my understanding that this comes from the so-called Ruthenian Rescension(sic) as promulgated through the reforms of St. Peter Mohyla in the mid-17th century and which would have represented the common practice in that part of Europe dating back to pre-union times. (ACROD's Liturgy in English follows this form to this day.) Perhaps I am in error, but this would lead me to believe that the Church of Constantinople had used this practice at a far earlier date in time than 1838 - at least into the late 16th and early 17th centuries - being the time frame of the Unions of Brest and Uzhorod. Perhaps 1838 is the date when an attempt to make the same a uniform practice within all of the Church of Constantinople took place? Perhaps a student of Liturgical History might have the answer. Thank you!

The same thing struck me.

Logged

"Hearing a nun's confession is like being stoned to death with popcorn." --Abp. Fulton Sheen

I am a bit confused as the Greek Catholic usage, at least for the Ruthenians and the Galician/Ukrainians, in the Sluzebniks published in the 19th century in both Presov and some in L'viv prescribed the 'reformed' antiphons AND the Beatitudes. During the Great Fast, the Psalms 102/103 and 145/146 were prescribed in the place of aforementioned antiphons. It is my understanding that this comes from the so-called Ruthenian Rescension(sic) as promulgated through the reforms of St. Peter Mohyla in the mid-17th century and which would have represented the common practice in that part of Europe dating back to pre-union times. (ACROD's Liturgy in English follows this form to this day.) Perhaps I am in error, but this would lead me to believe that the Church of Constantinople had used this practice at a far earlier date in time than 1838 - at least into the late 16th and early 17th centuries - being the time frame of the Unions of Brest and Uzhorod. Perhaps 1838 is the date when an attempt to make the same a uniform practice within all of the Church of Constantinople took place? Perhaps a student of Liturgical History might have the answer. Thank you!

Well, in the Ottoman empire, it wasn't exactly legal to have catechumens. So that might be one reason.Here in Frankfurt, I mostly attend a Greek parish under the EP's Metropolitan Augustine, where the litany for the catechumens is prayed aloud. But it is a parish that does have catechumens.

Interesting article, but I have a question about this: "Following the 1838 reform, the Greeks (except the Athonite monks who kept the old order) replaced Psalms 102/103 ("Bless the Lord, O my soul") and 145/146 ("Praise the Lord, O my soul") as well as the Beatitudes, which follow, by antiphons, i.e. brief appeals to the Theotokos or to Christ, Who is risen and is praised in His saints. The Russians continue to sing, each Sunday, the two noted psalms and the Beatitudes. They are replaced by antiphons only at great feasts or on weekdays."

It seems to me that the Bulgarians follow the Greek use on that point. It might be because they were under Constantinople in 1838?

I am a bit confused as the Greek Catholic usage, at least for the Ruthenians and the Galician/Ukrainians, in the Sluzebniks published in the 19th century in both Presov and some in L'viv prescribed the 'reformed' antiphons AND the Beatitudes. During the Great Fast, the Psalms 102/103 and 145/146 were prescribed in the place of aforementioned antiphons. It is my understanding that this comes from the so-called Ruthenian Rescension(sic) as promulgated through the reforms of St. Peter Mohyla in the mid-17th century and which would have represented the common practice in that part of Europe dating back to pre-union times. (ACROD's Liturgy in English follows this form to this day.) Perhaps I am in error, but this would lead me to believe that the Church of Constantinople had used this practice at a far earlier date in time than 1838 - at least into the late 16th and early 17th centuries - being the time frame of the Unions of Brest and Uzhorod. Perhaps 1838 is the date when an attempt to make the same a uniform practice within all of the Church of Constantinople took place? Perhaps a student of Liturgical History might have the answer. Thank you!

Interesting. Thanks!

I should have noted that St. Peter Mohyla was the Orthodox Metropolitan of Kiev and all Halich from 1633 through his death in 1646. His tenure postdated the Union of Brest from 1596 and was contemporaneous with the 1646 Union of Uzghorod.